Raleigh, N.C. — Although the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling on Friday legalized same-sex marriage nationwide, advocates on both sides of the debate said the fight over gay rights is far for over in North Carolina.

Gay marriage has been legal in North Carolina since last October, when federal judges overturned the state's 2012 constitutional amendment defining marriage as being between one man and one woman. The Supreme Court ruling, however, was needed to settle the national debate, as 14 states continued to outlaw same-sex unions or refuse to recognize such marriages legally performed elsewhere.

"This is a hard-fought victory for same-sex couples and the LGBT community in every nook and cranny of this country for full equality," said Chris Sgro, executive director of Equality North Carolina.

Sgro said he married his longtime partner last fall after the initial federal court decision and called Friday's ruling "affirming."

"It obviously means that we know that this is going to continue to be the law of the land, and we don’t have to worry about our marriages being undone in the state of North Carolina," he said.

Same-sex marriage opponents were bitter and angry about the decision.

"We think it’s quite arrogant of the U.S. Supreme Court to assume the position of redefining an institution it didn’t create," said Tami Fitzgerald, executive director of the North Carolina Values Coalition. "It will impact the stability and structure of families across our country."

"I thought the states were making that decision. Why now is the federal government taking over everything the states used to do?" asked Ann Watke, a Catholic in Raleigh.

"You can’t discount thousands of years of history," said John Rustin, president of the North Carolina Family Policy Council. "Who’s to say, under that frame of mind, (marriage) won’t include multiple individuals or some other constructs in the future? Once you go down that path, it’s really difficult to determine where that will end."

Rustin and Fitzgerald said they plan to step up lobbying for legal protections in North Carolina for people who oppose gay marriage.

"One of our greatest concerns now is the threat to religious liberty that this opinion could pose to churches, to pastors and to individuals who have a fundamental belief marriage is only between one man and one woman," Rustin said.

"The fight shifts now in terms of making sure North Carolinians who have sincerely held religious beliefs about marriage still have the ability and freedom to exercise those beliefs and act on those beliefs," Fitzgerald said. "We don’t have a Religious Freedom Restoration Act in North Carolina. We will redouble our efforts now to get RFRA passed."

RFRA legislation would make it illegal for the state to "burden" a person's ability to follow his or her religious beliefs. The definition of "person" includes religious institutions, businesses and associations. Opponents of the bill suggest it could lead to government workers and those working for private businesses to refuse to provide services for any number of reasons based on race, gender or other characteristics.

Republican legislative leaders said in April that they had no plans to take up any RFRA proposals this year after similar laws in other states prompted national criticism by business and civil rights groups. Gov. Pat McCrory also said he didn't see the need for any such laws in North Carolina.

Lawmakers did pass legislation over McCrory's veto that allows magistrates and workers in county register of deeds offices to opt out of presiding over weddings or issuing marriage licenses if they have religious objections to same-sex marriage.

The Supreme Court ruling doesn't affect the magistrate opt-out law, but the American Civil Liberties Union is monitoring the impact of the legislation as it weighs a separate legal challenge to it.

"I think that (the marriage ruling) underlines the great skepticism the Supreme Court has for measures that target gays and lesbians for different treatment than heterosexual couples," said Chris Brook, legal director of the ACLU of North Carolina. "The timing of the introduction of this (magistrates) measure, as well as the legislative comment in support of this measure, make very plain that the General Assembly was targeting gay and lesbian North Carolinians for inferior treatment."

Gay-rights advocates, meanwhile, said they plan to continue lobbying for equality in the workplace as well as at the altar.

"We are still one of the 30-some states where you can be married and the next day be fired for being transgender," Sgro said. "We don’t have employment protections for gay and transgender employees. Seventy-some percent of North Carolinians actually think that these protections are so common-sense that they are already the law. Unfortunately, they are not."

Raleigh RoseJun 29, 2015

View quoted thread

I FORGOT A WORD, I MEANT IF I OWNA RESTAURANT AND NO GAYS OR LESBIANS ARE ALLOWED IN TO EAT OR EVEN WORK FOR MERead more at http://www.wral.com/share/page/1896337/?fb_connect_ctn=1&id=14740672#d72yY4HJELqiLi6p.99

— Posted by Timmy Strickland

Just curious Timmy-would you ask people who would work for your fictional restaurant or eat there if they had been divorced? How about if they had committed adultery? Would you let them eat or work there? Jesus never said anything about gay people, but he most certainly addressed divorce.

Rob CreekmoreJun 27, 2015

Yes, the debate is over.

John SnowJun 27, 2015

View quoted thread

He's sittin' on the dock of the bay, wastin' time ;-)

— Posted by Tammy Rush

Well done!

Todd WhitmerJun 27, 2015

View quoted thread

I FORGOT A WORD, I MEANT IF I OWNA RESTAURANT AND NO GAYS OR LESBIANS ARE ALLOWED IN TO EAT OR EVEN WORK FOR MERead more at http://www.wral.com/share/page/1896337/?fb_connect_ctn=1&id=14740672#d72yY4HJELqiLi6p.99

— Posted by Timmy Strickland

Oh Timmy--

Gay people for the most part don't eat fast food so don't worry, your McDonalds would be safe.

Timmy StricklandJun 27, 2015

View quoted thread

I DON,T CARE IF THE GAYS WON. I OWN A RESTAURANT AND NO GAYS OR LESBIANS ARE ALLOWED IN TO EAT OR EVEN WORK FOR ME

— Posted by Timmy Strickland

I FORGOT A WORD, I MEANT IF I OWNA RESTAURANT AND NO GAYS OR LESBIANS ARE ALLOWED IN TO EAT OR EVEN WORK FOR MERead more at http://www.wral.com/share/page/1896337/?fb_connect_ctn=1&id=14740672#d72yY4HJELqiLi6p.99

Sam NadaJun 27, 2015

View quoted thread

I DON,T CARE IF THE GAYS WON. I OWN A RESTAURANT AND NO GAYS OR LESBIANS ARE ALLOWED IN TO EAT OR EVEN WORK FOR ME

— Posted by Timmy Strickland

Please put a sign on the door stating your policy. Post the name of your restaurant here so everyone can make an informed choice about whether to support your views or not. You want to make a public statement, then make it.

Timmy StricklandJun 27, 2015

View quoted thread

The war is over.

The gays have won.

Give it up. Quit beating a dead horse. It will only hurt the Republicans in the end.

Accept defeat and move on. The gays won a great victory over the Church and the Constitution.

Accept it!

— Posted by Charlie Watkins

I DON,T CARE IF THE GAYS WON. I OWN A RESTAURANT AND NO GAYS OR LESBIANS ARE ALLOWED IN TO EAT OR EVEN WORK FOR ME

Todd WhitmerJun 27, 2015

It's quite simple, have those individuals who are against it, make it publicly known so we know who to avoid.

I will take my expendable income elsewhere.

Tammy RushJun 27, 2015

View quoted thread

Not sure who Otis is in my last post. Thanks auto correct.

— Posted by John Snow

He's sittin' on the dock of the bay, wastin' time ;-)

John SnowJun 27, 2015

View quoted thread

Actually wrong in two ways. This decision has nothing to do with churches, Otis a secular law. Second, they won because of the constitution. As they should have.